It's not really the sales from the next few months that are at issue, it's the IA flexing their untested legal doctrine that "fair use" means they can unilaterally create and alter digital licenses with no input from the rightsholder
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @Macrike
You can do that. You've always been able to do that. Librarians do that all the time. They work with IA to do that. This is an ambitious use but it's for an extraordinary situation. I don't see publishers or authors meeting the need so libraries have to.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Like where is the explosion of temporary free e-books as one to one replacements for the unusable physical books? Who are the publishers and authors making that happen?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Please tell me Arthur. What are the consequences in years to come if we decide that libraries don't need to function at any decent level of service during disease outbreaks? Tell me about the people suffering there and how they're being served.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
I am always going to instinctively side with producers over consumers in these disputes, ESPECIALLY when what we're talking about isn't academic publishing but entertainment
2 replies 1 retweet 11 likes -
And when those definitions aren't so clear? Remember Anne Rice and fan fiction?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
When those definitions aren't so clear then my stance isn't so clear, but this time they are
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @arthur_affect @VivJaye and
No one is making any attempted arguments here about transformative work at all, it's a red herring (unless you're taking the Maximum Consistency dorm room argument that to allow transformative work to exist logically implies IP as a concept must collapse under its contradictions)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Okay, so: earlier you mentioned that authors should have the right to remove their work from circulation. Anne Rice should certainly be able to remove her work from fanfic consideration then, surely?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @VivJaye @arthur_affect and
The hard line approach both sides are taking on this thing is fucking weird, quite frankly. Like, am I wrong to give my copy of bone to the kid of a single mother I know? Certainly no money goes to Jeff Smith in that transaction
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
The nature of a physical platform means you are deprived of the book upon giving it away, so it's not the same thing The whole argument rests on the fact that letting someone copy a digital file doesn't affect you at all
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.